On Tuesday 29 October 2002 05:02 pm, Martin v. Loewis wrote: > "Patrick K. O'Brien" <pobrien@orbtech.com> writes: > > But it does look sloppy when you are writing about introspection and > > you see an attribute that has no real value. I wish it weren't > > there, as I'd rather not have to explain it. But it got me thinking > > whether other modules in the standard library have this issue, and > > whether this is something that should be cleaned up. Thoughts? > > Normally, this is fixed with __all__: The module may have arbitrary > variables; the interface is only those identifiers mentioned in > __all__ (in absence of __all__, its only those identifiers which are > documented). Well, in this case, keyword's __all__ looks like: __all__ =3D ["iskeyword"] Which leaves out keyword.kwlist, a pretty useful attribute. > So I don't think this is an issue, in general. In a specific case, > there is nothing wrong with fixing it. I'd also suggest that __all__ as a determiner of a module's api is severe= ly=20 underdocumented. Maybe I just picked the wrong module to start off my article. ;-) --=20 Patrick K. O'Brien Orbtech http://www.orbtech.com/web/pobrien ----------------------------------------------- "Your source for Python programming expertise." -----------------------------------------------
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4